I didn't even notice those changes when I watched the Blu-rays... but are they THAT big of a deal? Granted, the R2 change does create a continuity error... but the addition of the Dug who may or may not be Sebulba in Jabba's palace, if you didn't know it wasn't there to begin with, would you really care either way?

It's funny how people always defend Lucas's tinkering by citing the least worst examples. No, adding a CGI rock in front of R2D2 isn't a huge deal, even though it creates a continuity error. And no, adding a minor CGI character to the background of Jabba's palace isn't a huge deal either. But the new "NOOOOOO!!!" added to the scene of Vader killing the Emperor is one of those god fucking awful changes that simply halt the movie to a dead stop, making you cringe and wonder what the hell Lucas was thinking.

Well, I do agree that that was one of the major changes that should NOT have been made. It takes a bit away from what is otherwise a fairly subtle moment in an otherwise unsubtle movie. Of course, it's really not that audible over all the other sounds going on at the same time, so it's a little forgiving, I guess. And, yes, I wish they'd kept the original, funkier song performed by the Max Rebo Band upon deciding to incorporate Joh Yowza and make that scene a more lavish production number. And, yes, I wish Harrison Ford didn't walk behind the stand-in actor for Jabba when originally shooting that scene so they wouldn't have to make it appear as though Han is stepping over Jabba's tail. And, yes, I wish Lucas had realized he'd have rather had Greedo shoot first when he was still filming Episode IV. But what can you do? One continuity error that I'm puzzled as to why Lucas keeps bypassing (missing?): when shooting the newer, more intimidating wampa for the SE version of Episode V, why did he not also re-shoot the shots of the wampa mauling Luke and his tauntaun with the same new likeness?

But at the end of the day, no matter how much Episodes IV-VI meant to many of us in our youth, the SW movies are really little more than merely glorified "Buck Rogers" flicks, and we've probably wasted too much time obsessing over every little detail in them. I've moved on to meatier fare in my adulthood, and so should the rest of us big-time cineasts.

Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:15 am

Dragonbeard

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

Blonde Almond wrote:

I think you should probably see the film before making a statement like this. Just because Scorcese made a film in 3d doesn't mean that he's somehow disrespecting the history of film. Apart from the 3d in Hugo being arguably the best-implemented and well-reasoned of any film since the revival of the format, the film itself actually ends up being all about film preservation and the importance of cinema history.

To me, Scorcese's use of 3d in Hugo is a legitimate attempt to bring some artistic validity to a format that is widely scoffed at in the critical community. Bringing it back on topic, George Lucas, on the other hand, appears to see it purely as another means to cash in on the Star Wars name. I doubt I'll have even a passing interest in revisiting the films in 3d, especially the prequel episodes. Truthfully, I haven't given any money to Lucas in a long time, and I don't plan to anytime soon. The only exception would be if or when the original, unedited films are released again. Something tells me though that once those become available, not many people will have much interest in the revised versions or other releases, which might explain why Lucas doesn't seem willing to put them back on the market.

I've no doubt that the 3D is epic and that Scorcese has done a fantastic job but I dislike 3D as a tool anyway, so I probably will never know how good it is.

To me, 3D is like motion controls for consoles. It will spawn a little innovation here and there but ultimately it is a step sideways, not forwards as far as the things that matter are concerned. It will backfire though, I'm certain of it. 3D will give people the opportunity to save money on cinematography, writing, acting etc since you can probably distract people from this for a while (ironically, cinematography is one of the LAST things the average movie goer looks for, considering it is a visual medium). You cant get away with this forever though and for every Scorcese trying to do good, there will be a dozen idiots who will run 3D into the ground.

My view with both issues, motion controls and 3D, is just let people have their fun. I don't have the confidence in 3D that it will ever be more than a passing distraction or a money maker. I do have confidence that people will simply not pay for it, cinemas will go out of business and the film industry will suffer accordingly.

On topic - what is the deal with this added rock? Sounds... wat

Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:47 pm

Jeff Wilder

Director

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pmPosts: 1463

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

H.I. McDonough wrote:

But at the end of the day, no matter how much Episodes IV-VI meant to many of us in our youth, the SW movies are really little more than merely glorified "Buck Rogers" flicks, and we've probably wasted too much time obsessing over every little detail in them. I've moved on to meatier fare in my adulthood, and so should the rest of us big-time cineasts.

True. I like Star Wars as much as the next person. But I'm not the biggest fan of it and it wasn't that much of an infleunce on me in terms fo writing, storytelling or filmmaking. Speaking simply as a cinema buff, I'd trade 100 Star Wars for one Aliens or one Apocalypse Now.

_________________This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

But at the end of the day, no matter how much Episodes IV-VI meant to many of us in our youth, the SW movies are really little more than merely glorified "Buck Rogers" flicks, and we've probably wasted too much time obsessing over every little detail in them. I've moved on to meatier fare in my adulthood, and so should the rest of us big-time cineasts.

No argument there. I'm a casual fan at best. Lucas's bullshit offends me, but it's more about the principle of the matter, and the implications for other movies if other filmmakers adopt his careless attitude about film preservation, than any nostalgia I have for Star Wars.

But at the end of the day, no matter how much Episodes IV-VI meant to many of us in our youth, the SW movies are really little more than merely glorified "Buck Rogers" flicks, and we've probably wasted too much time obsessing over every little detail in them. I've moved on to meatier fare in my adulthood, and so should the rest of us big-time cineasts.

Speak for yourself. I don't feel the need to condescend to the Star Wars movies, and I will happily place it on my shelf alongside Taxi Driver, The Godfather, and other films that speak to me as a movie lover.

Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:13 pm

H.I. McDonough

Director

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pmPosts: 1310

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

Ken wrote:

H.I. McDonough wrote:

But at the end of the day, no matter how much Episodes IV-VI meant to many of us in our youth, the SW movies are really little more than merely glorified "Buck Rogers" flicks, and we've probably wasted too much time obsessing over every little detail in them. I've moved on to meatier fare in my adulthood, and so should the rest of us big-time cineasts.

Speak for yourself. I don't feel the need to condescend to the Star Wars movies, and I will happily place it on my shelf alongside Taxi Driver, The Godfather, and other films that speak to me as a movie lover.

Well, technically I do, too, but after seeing thousands of more films over the last decade plus, Episodes IV-VI are no longer the untouchable "Citizen Kane," "Casablanca," and "Gone with the Wind" of my life that they once were. That pedestal now has films like "2001," "Fanny and Alexander," and "Repulsion" on it, whereas SW ("Hope" and "Empire," anyway) is probably on the next one down. Hell, if you've noticed in the past, I'm one of the few people who also openly enjoys the prequels.

But NONE of this would bother me if Lucas would just make the original cuts available in something other than poor non-anamorphic DVD transfers of old Laserdisc prints. We can argue all day about how the changes do or don't ruin the movies, about how they are or aren't justified, about how it is or isn't Lucas's legal and/or moral right to do it, but it's just a load of horseshit either way that he refuses to preserve the original cuts.

Lucas has the original cuts digitally transferred and perfectly preserved. After he dies, they will almost certainly be made available - at a premium cost, of course. It's not as if they're lost or he has had them destroyed. He's just embarrassed by them.

I still don't understand why, if he's so upset with the originals, he doesn't simply remake them. Either by using the original performances and applying major CGI to everything or getting new actors and re-filming them from scratch. My guess is that he no longer has the desire to make movies. Sure, he's converting the originals to 3D, but that's not filmmaking, that's tinkering. Whatever happened to all the "small" films he was going to do after SITH? Been six years and we haven't seen anything. I wonder if we ever will. I just think Lucas has lost the passion that originally drove him and now he's just doing things to keep the cash rolling in, to tweak the fans, and to keep himself amused.

Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:55 pm

Ken

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

There's absolutely nothing stopping him from making other movies.

I think he lost his drive to make movies, and I think it may have happened before the prequel trilogy. It is entirely possible that he made those to fulfill some sense of obligation or destiny, not necessarily because of a genuine creative impulse. Consider that his only cinematic output in the '80s was either Star Wars or Indiana Jones movies, and his time in the '90s was spent on other projects--mainly producing TV shows, video games, or other people's stuff. With few notable exceptions, I don't think filmmakers can go that long without making films unless they're not interested in doing so.

But NONE of this would bother me if Lucas would just make the original cuts available in something other than poor non-anamorphic DVD transfers of old Laserdisc prints. We can argue all day about how the changes do or don't ruin the movies, about how they are or aren't justified, about how it is or isn't Lucas's legal and/or moral right to do it, but it's just a load of horseshit either way that he refuses to preserve the original cuts.

Lucas has the original cuts digitally transferred and perfectly preserved. After he dies, they will almost certainly be made available - at a premium cost, of course. It's not as if they're lost or he has had them destroyed. He's just embarrassed by them.

I still don't understand why, if he's so upset with the originals, he doesn't simply remake them. Either by using the original performances and applying major CGI to everything or getting new actors and re-filming them from scratch. My guess is that he no longer has the desire to make movies. Sure, he's converting the originals to 3D, but that's not filmmaking, that's tinkering. Whatever happened to all the "small" films he was going to do after SITH? Been six years and we haven't seen anything. I wonder if we ever will. I just think Lucas has lost the passion that originally drove him and now he's just doing things to keep the cash rolling in, to tweak the fans, and to keep himself amused.

This x's a million! I think he sees a release of the originals to be a last resort (as he clearly does not like them anymore) when people stop forking over cash for what he does like that will be the signal to release the old versions.

I'm sorry the movies you guys originally saw and fell in love with were, for the most part, regarded by their maker as somewhat compromised visions. But them's the breaks. Yes, some of the changes he's made have been extraneous, and, thus, as with "E.T." and "Superman II" and "Apocalypse Now," there will likely never be definitive cuts of Episodes IV & VI (V - the least altered installment - is just fine, IMO... except that the wampa who mauled Luke STILL doesn't match the one now in the cave ) that will be made available to the public. We might as well get used to it.

Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:29 pm

Dragonbeard

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

Jory wrote:

Dragonbeard wrote:

You know you CAN get the originals (or COULD get) on dvd right?

In terrible non-anamorphic Laserdisc-to-DVD transfers, yes.

Are we talking about the same thing? The DVD set where you get the three re-mastered movies and the three originals? They look pretty good, I have to say. Or at least, they're good enough to appreciate the movies in their original form (and they look better than the original VHS copies that I have from pre 1997).

Sadly, Star Wars doesn't meet my criteria for BRD purchases (it has to be something I don't already own and if I do, it has to be something worth seeing in hi-def). I don't have a problem with what Lucas is doing really... but how often have people bought a set of the films then suddenly realised they have the 'old model'? That shouldn't happen with movies!

Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:14 am

Jaimie

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

Quote:

Are we talking about the same thing? The DVD set where you get the three re-mastered movies and the three originals? They look pretty good, I have to say. Or at least, they're good enough to appreciate the movies in their original form (and they look better than the original VHS copies that I have from pre 1997).

Wow. If I can buy the originals on DVD in decent quality, I would. Can you link to Amazon or somewhere selling those? Or maybe I need to torrent them...

The tin contains three dvd cases, each one has the remastered movie on one disc and the 'original' on another.

Is this being sold in America?

Looks like the same one's we could've gotten in the states except Region 2. Remastered updates and virtually "untouched" (i.e. no remastering, non-anamorphic) original versions of the movies.

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:57 pm

Ken

Re: September 19, 2011: "George Lucas: Childhood Rapist?"

The DVD versions of the originals currently available aren't the prettiest possible versions, but they are the best available to date. Compare them to the last legit releases--the VHS box set in 1995. Ew.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum